MisterTweak:"And you have many good qualities," the judge said. "You are a good neighbor, you help the elderly and you are a doting father to your 10-year-old daughter."

But then the judge listed Castanier's criminal record of one felony for making a bomb threat as a juvenile and multiple charges resulting in 11 misdemeanor convictions as an adult including domestic violence, assault, vandalism, and drunken driving.

There is no need to perhaps reconsider if the qualifications for owning a handgun need to be a tad higher than "able to fog a mirror within three attempts", surely.

Part of the charges was for being a felon in possession of a gun. He didn't have it legally, so he already didn't meet qualifications for handgun ownership. However, the troll must troll, and we shall put that to rest.

"And you have many good qualities," the judge said. "You are a good neighbor, you help the elderly and you are a doting father to your 10-year-old daughter."

But then the judge listed Castanier's criminal record of one felony for making a bomb threat as a juvenile and multiple charges resulting in 11 misdemeanor convictions as an adult including domestic violence, assault, vandalism, and drunken driving.

There is no need to perhaps reconsider if the qualifications for owning a handgun need to be a tad higher than "able to fog a mirror within three attempts", surely.

It wasn't, ya doof. It was illegal for him to have the gun. Hence he was sentenced to, and I quote "7 to 22½ years in prison after pleading guilty last month to manslaughter and being a felon in possession of a firearm"

Does nobody get that the current laws are already enough to keep guns out of people's hands IF LAWS WORKED LIKE THAT!?

K-jack:doglover: namatad: How was it legal for him to have a gun in his hands?

It wasn't, ya doof. It was illegal for him to have the gun. Hence he was sentenced to, and I quote "7 to 22½ years in prison after pleading guilty last month to manslaughter and being a felon in possession of a firearm"

Does nobody get that the current laws are already enough to keep guns out of people's hands IF LAWS WORKED LIKE THAT!?

You don't understand what the crime "felon in possession" entails. If an underlying crime was a felony, the weapons charge can be tacked on as an additional crime because you possessed the gun while committing that felony. For instance, a drug dealer caught with a kilo of coke and a .45 can be convicted of felon in possession even if the dealer could legally own the gun prior to the bust. Merely possessing a gun during the commission of the felony opens you up to the felon in possession charge.

Under the circumstances, this guy pled to a felony. Since a gun was used in the course of that felony, he was also handed a felon in possession charge, which he also pled to. This has absolutely nothing to do with his prior ability to legally own a firearm.

An interesting theory... Except this part of the article rather strongly implies that he had been convicted of a prior felony, meaning he could not legally own the gun:

But then the judge listed Castanier's criminal record of one felony for making a bomb threat as a juvenile and multiple charges resulting in 11 misdemeanor convictions as an adult including domestic violence, assault, vandalism, and drunken driving.

edmo:L.D. Ablo: The guy never had a gun because it's illegal for a convicted felon to own one.

Like when Christians commit evil acts but therefore aren't really Christian so you can't hold it against the rest of Responsible Christians?

More like when something's already illegal you don't need to keep passing laws against it.

Murder is illegal. When was the last time you saw people trying to legislate against murder itself as an idea? Never. It's the oldest rule: thou shalt not kill.

Gun ownership is already sufficiently legislated to do everything people who want "reform" want to happen. But the people who want reform don't realize it's the case and they keep trying to push for new laws that just make the same things that are already illegal illegal again. Their folly is even visible grammatically. It just don't make sense.

tinfoil-hat maggie:The Snow Dog: I knew a girl in college who, when she saw my .357 on my dresser, asked if she could see it. I opened it and checked to make sure it was empty. From her vantage point (sitting on the end of the bed) she could not have seen firsthand that it was empty. I handed it to her and she immediately pointed it at the TV and started pulling the trigger.

I said: Stop! Are you f*cking crazy!?

She said: I saw you check it.

I told her to never touch ANY of my guns, consider them always to be loaded. She got mad and she didn't touch ANY of my guns again.

(Damn it.)

/Oh well...

Well other than you leaving out your .357, which you had to check to make sure it was unloaded the girl was an idiot because guns aren't toys./Yes I learned to respect and use firearms at a young age.

I guess you didn't learn very well. You always check the weapon. Always.

verydrab:"If you looK in the mirror that is your world."That has to be one of the stupidest things to come out of a judges mouth.

Why would you say that? The guy on trial had told his minister he was worried about raising his daughter in this world. The judge simply informed the defendant that he, himself, was partially responsible for the state of the world his daughter lived in. I actually think what the judge said was rather poignant. This guy was worried about his daughter being exposed to external threats and harsh realities beyond his control when he should have been checking his own behavior all along.

Gawdzila:The thing is, people don't even have to be complete idiots to do it. It's just a fact of life that familiarity can create carelessness. The longer people live with firearms cars without incident, the more likely they are to treat them as relatively harmless and the more likely they are to take unsafe "shortcuts" or do careless things while handling or storing them. It's easy to write all these incidents off as people being complete morons, and in some cases (like this one) they blatantly are, but in a lot of cases it is really just the inevitable consequences of a lot of people taking little risks with familiar firearms cars.

I agree. We should limit people's ability to own and operate motor vehicles.